PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

EPYC 75F3

2021

Why buy it

✅+65.6% higher PassMark.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.0 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($5,383 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌166.7% higher power demand at 280W vs 105W.

Ryzen 9 5900X

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $4,834 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Delivers 492.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 280W, a 175W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (38,955 vs 64,505).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 75F3, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

EPYC 75F3

2021

Ryzen 9 5900X

2020

Why buy it

✅+65.6% higher PassMark.
✅+300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 32 cores / 64 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 24.
✅433.3% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 24) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +11.8% higher average FPS across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $4,834 less on MSRP ($549 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Delivers 492.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 71.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$ ($549 MSRP vs $5,383 MSRP).
✅Draws 105W instead of 280W, a 175W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Ryzen 9 5900X across 4 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.0 vs 71.0 PassMark/$ ($5,383 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
❌166.7% higher power demand at 280W vs 105W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (38,955 vs 64,505).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (64 MB vs 256 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 75F3, which brings 32 cores / 64 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen 9 5900X better than EPYC 75F3?

Not in a simple one-size-fits-all way. EPYC 75F3 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Ryzen 9 5900X is the better mainstream desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and day-to-day practicality.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, EPYC 75F3 is the better fit. You are getting 65.6% better PassMark, backed by 32 cores and 64 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Ryzen 9 5900X is the smarter buy today. Ryzen 9 5900X is $4,834 cheaper on MSRP at $549 MSRP versus $5,383 MSRP, and it gives you a 11.8% average FPS lead across 4 shared CPU game tests in our data. The trade-off is that EPYC 75F3 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 65.6% better PassMark. It is also 492.1% better value on MSRP (71.0 vs 12.0 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

EPYC 75F3 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2021 vs 2020), 300% larger total L3 cache (256 MB vs 64 MB), and more multi-core headroom with 32 cores / 64 threads instead of 12/24. That extra cache should hold up really well in CPU-limited games and high-refresh builds.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

EPYC 75F3 Benchmark Check

Ryzen 9 5900X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
1080p
low	198 FPS	323 FPS
medium	161 FPS	291 FPS
high	130 FPS	243 FPS
ultra	100 FPS	193 FPS
1440p
low	162 FPS	307 FPS
medium	126 FPS	248 FPS
high	98 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	78 FPS	157 FPS
4K
low	73 FPS	193 FPS
medium	61 FPS	156 FPS
high	47 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	103 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen 9 5900X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
1080p
low	507 FPS	772 FPS
medium	443 FPS	647 FPS
high	354 FPS	508 FPS
ultra	288 FPS	450 FPS
1440p
low	417 FPS	619 FPS
medium	373 FPS	536 FPS
high	308 FPS	443 FPS
ultra	243 FPS	364 FPS
4K
low	257 FPS	365 FPS
medium	234 FPS	318 FPS
high	205 FPS	289 FPS
ultra	171 FPS	255 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen 9 5900X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
1080p
low	948 FPS	832 FPS
medium	792 FPS	645 FPS
high	734 FPS	558 FPS
ultra	657 FPS	459 FPS
1440p
low	661 FPS	721 FPS
medium	552 FPS	565 FPS
high	503 FPS	488 FPS
ultra	442 FPS	407 FPS
4K
low	472 FPS	511 FPS
medium	374 FPS	421 FPS
high	330 FPS	374 FPS
ultra	268 FPS	308 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen 9 5900X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
1080p
low	1006 FPS	974 FPS
medium	908 FPS	974 FPS
high	782 FPS	934 FPS
ultra	679 FPS	826 FPS
1440p
low	770 FPS	959 FPS
medium	671 FPS	843 FPS
high	575 FPS	726 FPS
ultra	500 FPS	617 FPS
4K
low	556 FPS	694 FPS
medium	495 FPS	621 FPS
high	435 FPS	541 FPS
ultra	374 FPS	437 FPS

Open EPYC 75F3 Open Ryzen 9 5900X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of EPYC 75F3 and Ryzen 9 5900X

EPYC 75F3

The EPYC 75F3 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 15 March 2021 (4 years ago). It is based on the Milan (2021−2023) architecture. It features 32 cores and 64 threads. Base frequency is 2.95 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 256 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm+ process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 280 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 64,505 points. Launch price was $4,860.

Ryzen 9 5900X

The Ryzen 9 5900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 5 November 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) architecture. It features 12 cores and 24 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.8 GHz. L3 cache: 64 MB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 7 nm, 12 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 105 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-3200. Passmark benchmark score: 38,955 points. Launch price was $549.

⚡

Processing Power

The EPYC 75F3 packs 32 cores / 64 threads, while the Ryzen 9 5900X offers 12 cores / 24 threads — the EPYC 75F3 has 20 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the EPYC 75F3 versus 4.8 GHz on the Ryzen 9 5900X — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Ryzen 9 5900X (base: 2.95 GHz vs 3.7 GHz). The EPYC 75F3 uses the Milan (2021−2023) architecture (7 nm+), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022) (7 nm, 12 nm). In PassMark, the EPYC 75F3 scores 64,505 against the Ryzen 9 5900X's 38,955 — a 49.4% lead for the EPYC 75F3. L3 cache: 256 MB (total) on the EPYC 75F3 vs 64 MB on the Ryzen 9 5900X.

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
Cores / Threads	32 / 64+167%	12 / 24
Boost Clock	4 GHz	4.8 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2.95 GHz	3.7 GHz+25%
L3 Cache	256 MB (total)+300%	64 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512K (per core)
Process	7 nm+	7 nm, 12 nm
Architecture	Milan (2021−2023)	Vermeer (Zen3) (2020−2022)
PassMark	64,505+66%	38,955
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	21,000
Geekbench 6 Single	—	2,174
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	11,888

🧠

Memory & Platform

The EPYC 75F3 uses the SP3 socket (PCIe 4.0), while the Ryzen 9 5900X uses AM4 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 3200 on the EPYC 75F3 versus DDR4-3200 on the Ryzen 9 5900X — the EPYC 75F3 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 75F3 supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 128 GB — 187.9% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 8 (EPYC 75F3) vs 2 (Ryzen 9 5900X). PCIe lanes: 128 (EPYC 75F3) vs 24 (Ryzen 9 5900X) — the EPYC 75F3 offers 104 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: SP3 (EPYC 75F3) and A320,B350,X370,B450,X470,B550,X570 (Ryzen 9 5900X).

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
Socket	SP3	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 4.0	PCIe 4.0
Max RAM Speed	3200+79900%	DDR4-3200
Max RAM Capacity	4096	128 GB+3276700%
RAM Channels	8+300%	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	128+433%	24

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Ryzen 9 5900X has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (EPYC 75F3) vs AMD-V (Ryzen 9 5900X). Primary use case: Ryzen 9 5900X targets Workstation. Direct competitor: EPYC 75F3 rivals Xeon Platinum 8380; Ryzen 9 5900X rivals Core i9-12900K.

Feature	EPYC 75F3	Ryzen 9 5900X
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	AMD-V
Target Use	—	Workstation

💰

Value Analysis

The EPYC 75F3 launched at $5383 MSRP, while the Ryzen 9 5900X debuted at $549. On MSRP ($5383 vs $549), the Ryzen 9 5900X is $4834 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the EPYC 75F3 delivers 12.0 pts/$ vs 71.0 pts/$ for the Ryzen 9 5900X — making the Ryzen 9 5900X the 142.2% better value option.